November 2009 Copyright © 2009 Mississippi Department of Education 1 Mississippi Department of Education Office of Research and Statistics Mississippi.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Completing the Classroom Teacher and Non-Classroom Teacher Evaluations for Presented by: The Office of Talent Development Employee Evaluations.
Advertisements

Current legislation requires the phase-out of high school TAKS and replaces it with 12 EOC assessments in  English I, English II, English III  Algebra.
State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness.
Delaware’s Accountability Plan for Schools, Districts and the State Delaware Department of Education 6/23/04.
JUNE 26, 2012 BOARD MEETING Measures of Academic Progress (MAP)
Leader & Teacher SLTs 2014 – ComponentEvaluation for TeachersEvaluation for School Leaders Setting GoalsTeachers set two SLTs in collaboration with.
Common Questions What tests are students asked to take? What are students learning? How’s my school doing? Who makes decisions about Wyoming Education?
Vertical Scale Scores.
MELROSE PUBLIC SCHOOLS MELROSE VETERANS MEMORIAL MIDDLE SCHOOL OCTOBER 2013 MCAS Spring 2013 Results.
Update on the State Testing Program November 14, 2011.
Department of Research and Evaluation Santa Ana Unified School District 2011 CST API and AYP Elementary Presentation Version: Elementary.
1 Paul Tuss, Ph.D., Program Manager Sacramento Co. Office of Education August 17, 2009 California’s Integrated Accountability System.
1 Mississippi Department of Education Office of Research and Statistics Ken Thompson, Director January 20, 2011 Understanding The Mississippi Growth Model.
State and Federal Testing Accountability: Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Academic Performance Index (API) SAIT Training September 27, 2007.
End of Course Assessments School Year English Language Arts, Math, Biology, and Government.
2015 Texas Accountability System Overview and Updates August 13, 2015.
Jackson County School District “Raising the Standard” Test Data 2010.
What are the STAAR Performance Standards? Copyright 2013 by Region 7 Education Service Center. All rights reserved.
November 2006 Copyright © 2006 Mississippi Department of Education 1 Where are We? Where do we want to be?
Department of Research and Planning November 14, 2011.
Testing Coordinators: October 4, 2007 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) and Academic Performance Index (API)
Copyright © 2010, SAS Institute Inc. All rights reserved. How Do They Do That? EVAAS and the New Tests October 2013 SAS ® EVAAS ® for K-12.
Santa Ana Unified School District 2011 CST Enter School Name Version: Intermediate.
Michigan School Report Card Update Michigan Department of Education.
FBISD Grading Policy Changes EIA(Local) Student/Parent Handbook Page 11.
Assigns one of three ratings:  Met Standard – indicates campus/district met the targets in all required indexes. All campuses must meet Index 1 or 2.
2012 MOASBO SPRING CONFERENCE Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 1 April 26, 2012.
PED School Grade Reports (with thanks to Valley High School) ACE August 3, 2012 Dr. Russ Romans District Accountability Manager.
1 Getting Up to Speed on Value-Added - An Accountability Perspective Presentation by the Ohio Department of Education.
Federal and State Student Accountability Data Update Testing Coordinators Meeting Local District 8 09/29/09 1.
1 Accountability Systems.  Do RFEPs count in the EL subgroup for API?  How many “points” is a proficient score worth?  Does a passing score on the.
1 Mississippi Statewide Accountability System Adequate Yearly Progress Model Improving Mississippi Schools Conference June 11-13, 2003 Mississippi Department.
C R E S S T / CU University of Colorado at Boulder National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing Measuring Adequate Yearly.
Jackson County School District 2009 Accountability Report.
September 2009 Copyright © 2009 Mississippi Department of Education 1 Mississippi Department of Education Office of Research and Statistics District Test.
2007 – 2008 Assessment and Accountability Report LVUSD Report to the Board September 23, 2008 Presented by Mary Schillinger, Assistant Superintendent Education.
35% Non-FCAT Teachers – Teacher Level Student Growth Component – 40% Bay District has adopted teacher-level student growth measures for those teachers.
Our State. Our Students. Our Success. DRAFT. Nevada Department of Education Goals Goal 1 All students are proficient in reading by the end of 3 rd grade.
Every Student Matters Understanding the Indexes, the Tests, and Targeted Goal for STAAR 2016.
1 Testing Various Models in Support of Improving API Scores.
Conversation about State Report Card November 28, 2016
Teacher SLTs
Beresford School District Report Card Data 16-17
NHCS READY Report October 2016.
Accountability in California Before and After NCLB
Welcome to the BT Super Conference
Metropolitan Nashville Public Schools
Teacher SLTs
Student Growth Measurements and Accountability
2012 Accountability Determinations
January 17, 2017 Board Workshop
Growth Models Oklahoma
Kentucky’s New Accountability Model
Proactive Assessments
AchieveNJ: Teacher Evaluation Scoring Guide
Teacher SLTs
Muncy School District November 9, 2015
Irvington Public Schools
Teacher SLTs
Madison Elementary / Middle School and the New Accountability System
Presented by Joseph P. Stern
Quantitative Measures: Measuring Student Learning
State Assessment Update
Spencer County Public Schools
2019 Report Card Update Marianne Mottley Report Card Project Director
Understanding How the Ranking is Calculated
Teacher SLTs
Virginia Board of Education’s
English Learner Accountability Component
Spring 2019 MCAS Grade 10 Annotated Parent/Guardian Reports
Presentation transcript:

November 2009 Copyright © 2009 Mississippi Department of Education 1 Mississippi Department of Education Office of Research and Statistics Mississippi School Boards Association Fall Leadership Conference November 17, State Accountability Model

Accountability System Accountability designation for schools and districts. Accountability system that moves the State toward national average performance. Accountability system includes an achievement component, a growth component, and a graduation/dropout component. November 2009 Copyright © 2009 Mississippi Department of Education 2

Achievement Measure Quality of Distribution Index QDI The Quality of Distribution Index (QDI) should be used to measure achievement. The QDI is sensitive to changes in the distribution of student performance on state assessments. The QDI measures the distribution of student performance on state assessments around the cut points for Basic, Proficient, and Advanced performance. November 2009 Copyright © 2009 Mississippi Department of Education 3

Quality of Distribution Scale November 2009 Copyright © 2009 Mississippi Department of Education 4 Advanced = 3 Proficient = 2 Basic = 1 Minimal = 0

QDI Calculation November 2009 Copyright © 2009 Mississippi Department of Education 5 Total Number of student assessments taken Total Number of students in each proficiency level Convert all numbers to percentage of each proficiency level. # Count Advanced Proficient Basic Minimal Advanced Proficient Basic Minimal % 33.3% 16.6%

QDI Calculation Advanced 16.6 X 3 = 49.8 Proficient 33.3 X 2 = 66.6 Basic 33.3 X 1 = 33.3 Minimal 16.6 X 0 = 0 QDI = = = 149 November 2009 Copyright © 2009 Mississippi Department of Education 6

November 2009 Copyright © 2009 Mississippi Department of Education 8 8 What is it? It is an estimate of current performance based on past performance. It is a lot like predicting whether a baseball player is ready for the major leagues based on his batting average, or whether a runner is likely to win a race based on her time at the halfway point in the race. In the case of the Growth Model, a student’s past performance on the language arts and math assessments are used to predict the student’s expected performance on assessments of language arts, math, science, or social studies. Growth Model

Growth Composite Growth is a measurement tool to ensure that a student receives, at a minimum, one year’s worth of learning in one year. If, based on the prediction model, the students on average in a school receive at least one year’s learning in one year, the school will have met growth. November 2009 Copyright © 2009 Mississippi Department of Education 9

Students in Growth Analysis Meet Full Academic Year at the district level in 2007/2008 and 2008/2009 Have MCT2 scores from 2007/2008 Have 2008/2009 scores from MCT2, Grade 8 or 9 Algebra, or Grade 9 Biology. November 2009 Copyright © 2009 Mississippi Department of Education 10

Copyright © 2009 Mississippi Department of Education 11 A Strategy for Meeting Growth Looking at your students and how to target their needs – by subject. Advanced High Proficient Low Proficient High Basic Low Basic Minimal Provide all students opportunity to learn Advanced High Medium Low Proficient High Medium Low Basic High Medium Low Minimal High Medium Low Or another way of looking at students November 2009

Copyright © 2009 Mississippi Department of Education 12 A Strategy for Meeting Growth Your Response to Intervention should support this approach! Advanced High Medium Low Proficient High Medium Low Basic High Medium Low Minimal High Medium Low Tier 1 Likely Tier 2 Likely Tier 3 November 2009

Copyright © 2009 Mississippi Department of Education 13 Copyright © 2009 Mississippi Department of Education 13 What does it mean about instruction? Not all students will be learning the same thing all the time. You should not see classrooms where the teacher delivers all the instruction to the class as a whole. You should see classrooms where whole group instruction, small group instruction, and even one-to-one instruction is occurring. Growth Model

QDI and HSCI Combined Components for Schools with Grade 12 and Districts High Performing Star High Performing Successful High Performing Successful November 2009 Copyright © 2009 Mississippi Department of Education HSCI or 80% Graduation Rate 200 HSCI or 75% Graduation Rate

QDI Cut Points and Growth Assignments Chart November 2009 Copyright © 2009 Mississippi Department of Education 15 Cut Points for QDIGrowth Not MetGrowth Met High PerformingStar SuccessfulHigh Performing Academic WatchSuccessful At Risk of FailingAcademic Watch 0-99FailingLow Performing

Preliminary School Level Results November 2009 Copyright © 2009 Mississippi Department of Education 16 Cut Points for QDIGrowth Not Met 396 – 47% Growth Met 402 – 51.7% – 5.4% High Performing 4 – 0.5% Star - 31 – 3.9% High Performing % – 23.75% Successful 45 – 5.65% High Performing % Successful – 13 – 1.6% – 36.8% Academic Watch 139 – 17% Successful 158 – 19.8% – 26.4% At Risk of Failing 156 – 19.6% Academic Watch 55 – 6.9% – 7.6% Failing 55 – 6.9% Low Performing 6 – 0.8%

Preliminary District Level Results November 2009 Copyright © 2009 Mississippi Department of Education 17 Cut Points for QDIGrowth Not Met 85 – 56.3% Growth Met 66 – 43.7% – 1.35% High Performing 4 – 0.5% Star - 2 – 1.3% High Performing % – 21.2% Successful 5 – 3.3% High Performing % Successful – 7 – 4.6% – 35.8% Academic Watch 27 – 17.9% Successful 27 – 17.9% – 36.4% At Risk of Failing 45 – 29.8% Academic Watch 10 – 6.6% – 5.3% Failing 8 – 5.3% Low Performing 0 – 0.0%

Algebra I and Biology I Scores combined across middle/junior high school, 9 th grade school, and high school QDI based on the performance of all students in the above grades Students will contribute equally to the accountability model based on their performance November 2009 Copyright © 2009 Mississippi Department of Education 18

Contact Information Ken Thompson, Director Office of Research and Statistics  Click on “Accountability Information” November 2009 Copyright © 2009 Mississippi Department of Education 19